think that is likely, and it is possibly what opens the door to us offering him a deal he otherwise wouldnt take but one that would reward him if he backs himself to stay fit and against play a good number of games. It could be his best option.
2 Likes
Would have to start talking about myslef if we did that ! 
1 Like
Havenât we just hired a new club doctor? Canât be coincedence we are the most injured club in Europe. We arenât playing with an intensity that would justify it.
My questions are with the medical staff.
1 Like
Would that be the doctors or physiotherapists?
To be fair the Doctor only just started.
And is yet to accept my LinkedIn connect request, very disappointed.
I maybe wrong here but Doctors mainly diagnose injuries and illnesses, suggesting actions. Whilst physios/trainers are used to assess and recommend the reconditioning/fitness aspect - whilst having a basic medical back ground.
From an uneducated point of view, I would rather a top class physio department over a top class doctor department.
I agree, as you say there are definitely a lot of questions regarding the medical staff if you envelope both departments.
On a side note, there are some things you cant for see, and anticipate how the body reacts.
@Sweeting, I love your passion for youth football. I may have mentioned this to you before, my brother Ryan Lynch managed to play a few professional games for Crewe (after coming through the Coventry Academy) and additionally a friendly against Liverpool where he duelled against Dirk Kuyt.
Without bias and digressing out of pride, he was awesome - we used to have 7-asides preseason, Lynchsâ against Coventry youth and some first team players like Ben Turner and Jamie Tabb and he was just another level.
He used to train at Lilleshaw as a group of roughly 40 young English players in his age group - end of boast/admiration.
He ended up tearing his cruciate in a school game. Coventry flew in the same surgeon whom treated Alan Shearer - I think Steadman - from Colorado to carry out the surgery. In the end the new graft didnât take and he had to have surgery again, first game back he tore the other cruciate.
My point (finally got there) is that alot of injuries/illnesses can be out sourced to specialists, without them being on the books. Additionally, you can have the worlds best doctors carrying out your surgery for it to fail.
4 Likes
Iâm slightly wary of another partial owner injecting capital. When RedBird invested we started to imagine who we might sign, but the money went to existing shareholders and also to weather a covid storm. To the degree the latter prevented real hardship, fair enough. But put me down as underwhelmed.
If someone else now injects capital, what will the terms be? Pay off existing shareholders first? Leave a small fraction of the headline sum to strengthen the team?
I will wait to see what happens, but Iâd prefer a bold new owner, if FSG are unable to compete at the highest level due to FFP being ineffective.
The top priority would be a fair, rules based system. I wonât hold my breath.
1 Like
Red Birdâs investment was in FSG not in Liverpool FC, it was clear from the statement this was directly Liverpool FC so we donât really know what red birds investment in FSG did to the club in general.
6 Likes
I know that RedBird bought into FSG, and LFC is just part of the whole group (35% at a guess). Still, when RedBird invested it didnât matriculate into anything good happening on the pitch for us. So I am wary of an additional partial stakeholder.
I like FSG. They would be perfect owners in a rules based system. Sadly thatâs not what we have. I see their desire for a sale or dilution as evidence they know things have shifted, and they canât continue to compete at the highest level.
1 Like
I might be wrong but while itâs true any investment into FSG is FSG but the 2 most valuable assets of FSG is Red Sox and Liverpool. So any investors into FSG pretty much also will look at how FSG invest in everything connected to Liverpool FC including player acquisition, infrastructure improvements etc. And that plays a major part in any investment I dare say for any investors hoping for a global reach because Liverpool definitely have a much wider global fan base than Red Sox.
FSG is several aspects, the outline of the statement was the club, if you invest at this point you are investing in the club directly. The only reason I can think is to generate funding so the club can compete that seems now obvious.
1 Like
If the investment is into FSG, then FSG itself gets to decide where the money goes, right?
When Boston Red Sox and LFC needs money, which one will FSG choose or rather, which sport will FSG & John Henry choose?
Generally, of course. Its almost like you invest into a fund and the fund decides where to place the money in and you invest pretty much because you believe in their direction and strategy. Unless of course the investor has a specific requirement with FSG that their money goes only to a specific part and I would think that would not be public information necessarily.
And there is a distinct difference between Red Sox and Liverpool. And I believe they require different strategies and there is a reason why FSG was interested in Liverpool in the first place because Liverpool goes to places that Red Sox would probably never be able to go to in foreseeable future. So I would not believe that any investors into FSG would not put pressure onto FSG to ensure that their global reach through Liverpool is not under-utilized because of neglect.
1 Like
how unrealistic is a public subscription for private shares.
say $1000 a unit, only if fully sold, with 50% âgarunteedâ as going towards club facilities and assets, the rest as a dividend to current ownership.
thats 100,000 shares to make 100m pounds⌠and would only see about 2-3% of value released.(is that right?)
it would dilute shares, yes, but by a miniscule amount compared to the cash injection, recieved, and would probably be the best way into a part sale of the club without relinquishing any control.
people would put up the cash IMHO, be a pretty smelly investment on a pure monetary scale with the only upside being the chance of a capital gain when FSG do end up selling the club.
shares would have no rights, but could recieve dividends if ever awarded, and profits from eventual sale,
or is that a bit of a joke.
Both are largely self funding. If they were however to both need money then i would imagine FSG would provide it to each of them - the issue here is really about what is meanât by âneedâ.
I wouldnât be surprised if most of the money invested into FSG by Red Bird is going towards buying the new Las Vegas franchise in the NBA and whatever stake they sell in LFC will be spent on LFC.
I thought the Red Burd investment basically covered the Covid losses.
Can RedBird play midfield âŚ
No, a specialist winger.
3 Likes